2015 Update: For those of you coming here from a link posted elsewhere on the internet, please note that this thread has evolved quite a bit over the years with the last 3 to 5 pages being more about what NASA, NOAA and other "research" outfits are doing to the RAW temperature data, ie, they are changing the records to show a warming trend that the RAW DATA DOES NOT SHOW!

Posts toward the end also center on what is NOT happening where Climate is concerned, ie, those infamous computer simulations, also known as "Climate Models" that predicted gloom and doom THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED!

And lets be clear, no one here denies that the planet has warmed! What we deny is that man has any significant part in that warming process. I think the data provided in this thread will prove to you that the Sun and the oceans control the temperature of Earth and anyone that believes that Man can influence that process shows both their arrogance and ignorance!

Enjoy, and thanks for taking the time to come here and read this!

Now back to the original post content.

Instead of having a bunch of these anti-warming posts strung out thru this section, I'm going to make this one a sticky and we can just post new found links here and make it a running comentary on what AIN'T happening as far as the earth warming goes. So here's a start!

This is another good one. Hey Al Gore, how's this one working out for you, Michael Mann and the rest of the hoaxters?

Stockholm is forecast to experience its coldest seasonal temperatures for over 100 years this week as winter weather takes hold of the country, according to the Swedish Meteorological Institute (SMHI).Bitter winter on the way: expert (25 Nov 10)Swedish military called in to battle winter storm (24 Nov 10)Transport agency calls for caution after snow (23 Nov 10)Temperatures across the country are expected to drop to record lows for the first week of December, with the exception of the far north, with averages coming in 7-10 degrees Celsius below normal.

Stockholm registered -11 degrees Celsius at the weekend, the coldest November temperature since 1965 and the mercury is set to plunge further on Wednesday and Thursday, dropping as low as -15.

"It is far below average temperatures, which usually oscillate around zero at this time of the year," said Alexandra Ohlsson, a meteorologist with SMHI.

Dalarna and Jämtland in northern Sweden will also be hit with the harsh weather. The Storsjön lake in the heart of Jämtland's main city Östersund has already frozen over in most parts.

SMHI forecasted that in southern and central areas the cold will ease off somewhat come Friday. Northern Norrland will however drop to minus 14-17 degrees Celsius in the middle of the day.

The sub-zero temperatures are here to stay though, even in the south, Alexandra Ohlsson said.

"It looks like the sub-zero temperatures will persist," she said.

With more snow on the way in from the Baltic Sea, the current high snow depth of eight decimetres, recorded in Tidaholm in western Sweden, is set to be exceeded.

Habo and Mullsjö are some of the most wintry white municipalities in southern and central Sweden, and warnings have been issued over the dangers associated with heavy snowfalls.

Emergency services in Jönköping county in central Sweden are urging people to check their roofs, especially split-level houses where deep pockets of heavy snow can form.

SMHI was reluctant to issue a forecast for Christmas and on whether the temperatures will remain low enough to keep away the slush that typifies the festive season in many parts of southern and central Sweden.

How nice that while the "warmers" are in Cancun making plans on how they can dupe the public in general again with their HOAX, mother nature decides to give them the coldest temperatures that Cancun has seen in over 100 years!!!??? GOTTA LOVE IT!

The irony: As negotiators from nearly 200 countries met in Cancun to strategize ways to keep the planet from getting hotter, the temperature in the seaside Mexican city plunged to a 100-year record low of 54° F. Climate-change skeptics are gleefully calling Cancun's weather the latest example of the "Gore Effect" — a plunge in temperature they say occurs wherever former Vice President Al Gore, now a Nobel Prize-winning environmental activist, makes a speech about the climate. Although Gore is not scheduled to speak in Cancun, "it could be that the Gore Effect has announced his secret arrival," jokes former NASA scientist Roy W. Spencer.The reaction: ClimateGate was "bad enough," says Duncan Davidson in Wall Street Pit, but Cancun's weather is particularly "inconvenient" for global-warming alarmists. It's a reminder that global temperatures have "flatlined" despite rising carbon dioxide levels, "which is decidedly chilling against the concept of hampering economic growth to limit Co2 emissions." Grow up, says Tony Juniper in The Independent. "Sure, it's cold outside," but "the trend data show that the world is warming, that the climate is changing, and that the release of greenhouse gases is the cause." The longer we use every cold snap as an excuse to put off reducing emissions, "the bigger the risk we run. Tick tock, tick tock."

Millions begin the big Christmas and New Year getaway early as the AA urged motorists to beware of the ‘worst driving conditions imaginable’ Quarter of train services disrupted, travel warning in KentExperts warn of a backlog of up to 4 million of parcels which could remain undelivered this ChristmasThe NHS issues an urgent appeal for blood donors as concerns grow over shortagesCouncils reveal plans to share grit amid fears the cold snap could last until January 14 Odds shortened even further on a ‘White Christmas’ in some parts of the country next Saturday

Swathes of Britain skidded to a halt today as the big freeze returned - grounding flights, closing rail links and leaving traffic at a standstill.

And tonight the nation was braced for another 10in of snow and yet more sub-zero temperatures - with no let-up in the bitterly cold weather for at least a month, forecasters have warned.

The Arctic conditions are set to last through the Christmas and New Year bank holidays and beyond and as temperatures plummeted to -10c (14f) the Met Office said this December was ‘almost certain’ to become the coldest since records began in 1910.

The latest snowfall carpeted large swathes of Britain today - with up to 5in falling in places - paralysing roads and rail, and forcing airports and schools to close.

Forecasters warned the worst was still to come over the next 24 hours as the heaviest December snowfall for 30 years tightened its grip on the nation once more.

The South is expected to be worst hit with up to 10in falling during the course of tomorrow. By the start of next week temperatures are set to fall to as low as -15c (5f).

Met Office forecaster Barry Gromett said the average mean temperature for the first two weeks of this month was -0.7c.

The coldest ever average for this time of year - recorded in December 1981 - was 0.2c.

He said: ‘A significant amount of snow will fall over the next 24 hours, particularly across southern England.

‘Further snow showers are likely to hit Wales and the west before moving eastwards on Sunday.

‘It is going to remain very cold right through to the middle of next week with widespread overnight frosts and ice.

‘Temperatures are likely to drop into the minus teens in places, with towns and cities as cold as -8c (18f).

‘It’s going to stay like this throughout Christmas and New Year, but by the middle of next month things will slowly return to normal and we could perhaps see the beginning of the end.

‘Nevertheless, this December is almost certainly going to become the coldest since records began in 1910.

‘It’s already a lot colder than the previous record which was set in 1981.’

Britain's winter ends tomorrow with further indications of a striking environmental change: snow is starting to disappear from our lives.

Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain's culture, as warmer winters - which scientists are attributing to global climate change - produce not only fewer white Christmases, but fewer white Januaries and Februaries.

The first two months of 2000 were virtually free of significant snowfall in much of lowland Britain, and December brought only moderate snowfall in the South-east. It is the continuation of a trend that has been increasingly visible in the past 15 years: in the south of England, for instance, from 1970 to 1995 snow and sleet fell for an average of 3.7 days, while from 1988 to 1995 the average was 0.7 days. London's last substantial snowfall was in February 1991.

Global warming, the heating of the atmosphere by increased amounts of industrial gases, is now accepted as a reality by the international community. Average temperatures in Britain were nearly 0.6Â°C higher in the Nineties than in 1960-90, and it is estimated that they will increase by 0.2C every decade over the coming century. Eight of the 10 hottest years on record occurred in the Nineties.

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.

The effects of snow-free winter in Britain are already becoming apparent. This year, for the first time ever, Hamleys, Britain's biggest toyshop, had no sledges on display in its Regent Street store. "It was a bit of a first," a spokesperson said.

Fen skating, once a popular sport on the fields of East Anglia, now takes place on indoor artificial rinks. Malcolm Robinson, of the Fenland Indoor Speed Skating Club in Peterborough, says they have not skated outside since 1997. "As a boy, I can remember being on ice most winters. Now it's few and far between," he said.

Michael Jeacock, a Cambridgeshire local historian, added that a generation was growing up "without experiencing one of the greatest joys and privileges of living in this part of the world - open-air skating".

Warmer winters have significant environmental and economic implications, and a wide range of research indicates that pests and plant diseases, usually killed back by sharp frosts, are likely to flourish. But very little research has been done on the cultural implications of climate change - into the possibility, for example, that our notion of Christmas might have to shift.

Professor Jarich Oosten, an anthropologist at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, says that even if we no longer see snow, it will remain culturally important.

"We don't really have wolves in Europe any more, but they are still an important part of our culture and everyone knows what they look like," he said.

David Parker, at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research in Berkshire, says ultimately, British children could have only virtual experience of snow. Via the internet, they might wonder at polar scenes - or eventually "feel" virtual cold.

Heavy snow will return occasionally, says Dr Viner, but when it does we will be unprepared. "We're really going to get caught out. Snow will probably cause chaos in 20 years time," he said.

The chances are certainly now stacked against the sortof heavy snowfall in cities that inspired Impressionist painters, such as Sisley, and the 19th century poet laureate Robert Bridges, who wrote in "London Snow" of it, "stealthily and perpetually settling and loosely lying".

Not any more, it seems.

Remember, this was written back in 2000 and look at what has actually happened 10 years later? More of the "hoax" exposed!

This Summer here is a cold one and people might think that its all Global Warming Stuff but i remember one Christmas day when i was a kid where it SNOWED in Adelaide. Usually Christmas here is HOT. Oh by the way the massive salt lakes in central Australia are flooded this year, just like it was 30 years ago. Its all a big long cycle. Its just that Al Gore didn't think about it back then.

Piers Corbyn not only predicted the current weather, but he believes things are going to get much worse, says Boris Johnson, London's mayor

The man who repeatedly beats the Met Office at its own game

Well, folks, it's tea-time on Sunday and for anyone involved in keeping people moving it has been a hell of a weekend. Thousands have had their journeys wrecked, tens of thousands have been delayed getting away for Christmas; and for those Londoners who feel aggrieved by the performance of any part of our transport services, I can only say that we are doing our level best.

Almost the entire Tube system was running on Sunday and we would have done even better if it had not been for a suicide on the Northern Line, and the temporary stoppage that these tragedies entail. Of London's 700 bus services, only 50 were on diversion, mainly in the hillier areas. On Saturday, we managed to keep the West End plentifully supplied with customers, and retailers reported excellent takings on what is one of the busiest shopping days of the year.Advertisement: Story continues below

We have kept the Transport for London road network open throughout all this. We have about 90,000 tons of grit in stock, and the gritters were out all night to deal with this morning's rush. And yet we have to face the reality of the position across the country.

It is no use my saying that London Underground and bus networks are performing relatively well - touch wood - when Heathrow, our major international airport, is still effectively closed two days after the last heavy snowfall; when substantial parts of our national rail network are still struggling; when there are abandoned cars to be seen on hard shoulders all over the country; and when yet more snow is expected today, especially in the north.

In a few brief hours, we are told, the snowy superfortresses will be above us again, bomb bays bulging with blizzard. It may be that in the next hours and days we have to step up our de-icing, our gritting and our shovelling. So let me seize this brief gap in the aerial bombardment to pose a question that is bugging me. Why did the Met Office forecast a "mild winter"?

Do you remember? They said it would be mild and damp, and between one degree and one and a half degrees warmer than average. Well, I am now 46 and that means I have seen more winters than most people on this planet, and I can tell you that this one is a corker.

Never mind the record low attained in Northern Ireland this weekend. I can't remember a time when so much snow has lain so thickly on the ground, and we haven't even reached Christmas. And this is the third tough winter in a row. Is it really true that no one saw this coming?

Actually, they did. Allow me to introduce readers to Piers Corbyn, meteorologist and brother of my old chum, bearded leftie MP Jeremy. Piers Corbyn works in an undistinguished office in Borough High Street. He has no telescope or supercomputer. Armed only with a laptop, huge quantities of publicly available data and a first-class degree in astrophysics, he gets it right again and again.

Back in November, when the Met Office was still doing its "mild winter" schtick, Corbyn said it would be the coldest for 100 years. Indeed, it was back in May that he first predicted a snowy December, and he put his own money on a white Christmas about a month before the Met Office made any such forecast. He said that the Met Office would be wrong about last year's mythical "barbecue summer", and he was vindicated. He was closer to the truth about last winter, too.

He seems to get it right about 85 per cent of the time and serious business people - notably in farming - are starting to invest in his forecasts. In the eyes of many punters, he puts the taxpayer-funded Met Office to shame. How on earth does he do it? He studies the Sun.

He looks at the flow of particles from the Sun, and how they interact with the upper atmosphere, especially air currents such as the jet stream, and he looks at how the Moon and other factors influence those streaming particles.

He takes a snapshot of what the Sun is doing at any given moment, and then he looks back at the record to see when it last did something similar. Then he checks what the weather was like on Earth at the time - and he makes a prophecy.

I have not a clue whether his methods are sound or not. But when so many of his forecasts seem to come true, and when he seems to be so consistently ahead of the Met Office, I feel I want to know more. Piers Corbyn believes that the last three winters could be the harbinger of a mini ice age that could be upon us by 2035, and that it could start to be colder than at any time in the last 200 years. He goes on to speculate that a genuine ice age might then settle in, since an ice age is now cyclically overdue.

Is he barmy? Of course he may be just a fluke-artist. It may be just luck that he has apparently predicted recent weather patterns more accurately than government-sponsored scientists. Nothing he says, to my mind, disproves the view of the overwhelming majority of scientists, that our species is putting so much extra CO? into the atmosphere that we must expect global warming.

The question is whether anthropogenic global warming is the exclusive or dominant fact that determines our climate, or whether Corbyn is also right to insist on the role of the Sun. Is it possible that everything we do is dwarfed by the moods of the star that gives life to the world? The Sun is incomparably vaster and more powerful than any work of man. We are forged from a few clods of solar dust. The Sun powers every plant and form of life, and one day the Sun will turn into a red giant and engulf us all. Then it will burn out. Then it will get very nippy indeed.

WASHINGTON (AP) - A band of frigid weather snaking its way up the East Coast on Sunday threatened to bring blizzards and a foot of snow to New York City and New England, while several states made emergency declarations as the storm caused crashes on slick roads.

Airlines grounded hundreds of flights Sunday along the Northeast corridor in anticipation of the storm, affecting major airports including New York's JFK and Newark. Airlines said more cancellations were likely as the storm progressed. Travel misery began a day earlier in parts of the South, where a rare white Christmas came with reports of dozens of car crashes.

In Washington transportation officials pretreated roads and readied 200 salt trucks, plows and other pieces of equipment to fight the 6 inches or more expected to fall in the Mid-Atlantic region.

The Northeast is expected to get the brunt of the storm. Forecasters issued a blizzard warning for New York City for Sunday and Monday, with a forecast of 11 to 16 inches of snow and strong winds that will reduce visibility to near zero at times. A blizzard warning was also in effect for Rhode Island and most of eastern Massachusetts including Boston, with forecasters predicting 15 to 20 inches of snow. A blizzard warning is issued when snow is accompanied by sustained winds or gusts over 35 mph.

As much as 18 inches could fall on the New Jersey shore with wind gusts over 40 mph.

Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter declared a snow emergency as of 2 p.m. Sunday, and he urged residents to stay off the roads.

By early Sunday, Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina had also declared states of emergency. Amtrak canceled several of its trains in Virginia.

"Winds with gusts up to 45 miles per hour will cause blowing snow and that's going to cause the worst of it," Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell told The Weather Channel Saturday night. "We're urging extreme caution in travel. Try to get home early and if you don't have to travel don't go."

Major airlines were canceling flights in the storm's path Sunday. Continental Airlines canceled 250 departures from Newark Liberty International Airport outside New York City. United Airlines canceled dozens of Sunday departures from Newark, Philadelphia, New York's LaGuardia and JFK, Boston and other airports. AirTran and Southwest Airlines also canceled flights, mostly in or out of Washington Dulles, Baltimore and Newark.

"Most cancelations are concentrated from the Carolinas through New York," he said.

Mary Sanderson at American Airlines said flights through Washington, Baltimore and Philadelphia would likely be canceled after 2 or 3 p.m. Sunday, with late starts expected Monday morning.

More than 800 flights had been canceled as of Sunday morning at New York's LaGuardia and John F. Kennedy International Airport and at Newark Liberty International Airport, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey said.

Most carriers were waiving fees for one-time changes in affected areas and urging passengers to make changes through their websites.

The monster storm is the result of a low pressure system off the North Carolina coast that will strengthen into a major storm as it moves northeast, according to the National Weather Service.

Early Sunday, winter storm warnings stretched from Georgia through New England.

The white Christmas in the South was one for the record books. Columbia, S.C., had its first significant Christmas snow since weather records were first kept in 1887. Atlanta had just over an inch of snow—the first measurable accumulation on Christmas Day since the 1880s.

The North Carolina Highway Patrol said late Saturday that most of the roads in and around Asheville were either covered or partially covered with snow and ice. Emergency management spokeswoman Julia Jarema said troopers in the two dozen westernmost counties answered 350 calls in 18 hours Saturday. Most were wrecks.

"We're busy," Ryan Dean of Dean's Wrecker Service in Raleigh, NC, said Sunday. "We've been out since 3 in the morning pulling people out of the ditch."

___

Contributing to this report were Associated Press writers Kristin M. Hall in Nashville; Page Ivey in Columbia; Karen Hawkins in Chicago; Warren Levinson and Verena Dobnik in New York City; David Goodman in Detroit; Eileen Sullivan and Samantha Bomkamp in Washington; Michelle Price in Phoenix; Dylan Lovan in Louisville; Leonard Pallats and Greg Bluestein in Atlanta; and Mark Pratt in Boston.

Some Himalayan glaciers are advancing rather than melting, study finds

Researchers have discovered that contrary to popular belief half of the ice flows in the Karakoram range of the mountains are actually growing rather than shrinking.

challenges claims made in a 2007 report by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that the glaciers would be gone by 2035.

Although the head of the panel Dr Rajendra Pachauri later admitted the claim was an error gleaned from unchecked research, he maintained that global warming was melting the glaciers at "a rapid rate", threatening floods throughout north India.

The new study by scientists at the Universities of California and Potsdam has found that half of the glaciers in the Karakoram range, in the northwestern Himlaya, are in fact advancing and that global warming is not the deciding factor in whether a glacier survives or melts.

Dr Bodo Bookhagen, Dirk Scherler and Manfred Strecker studied 286 glaciers between the Hindu Kush on the Afghan-Pakistan border to Bhutan, taking in six areas.

Their report, published in the journal Nature Geoscience, found the key factor affecting their advance or retreat is the amount of debris – rocks and mud – strewn on their surface.

Glaciers surrounded by high mountains and covered with more than two centimetres of debris are protected from melting.

Debris-covered glaciers are common in the rugged central Himalaya, but they are almost absent in subdued landscapes on the Tibetan Plateau, where retreat rates are higher.

In contrast, more than 50 per cent of observed glaciers in the Karakoram region in the northwestern Himalaya are advancing or stable.

"Our study shows that there is no uniform response of Himalayan glaciers to climate change and highlights the importance of debris cover for understanding glacier retreat, an effect that has so far been neglected in predictions of future water availability or global sea level," the authors concluded.

Dr Bookhagen said their report had shown "there is no stereotypical Himalayan glacier" in contrast to the UN's climate change report which, he said, "lumps all Himalayan glaciers together."

Dr Pachauri, head of the Nobel prize-winning UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has remained silent on the matter since he was forced to admit his report's claim that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 was an error and had not been sourced from a peer-reviewed scientific journal. It came from a World Wildlife Fund report.

He angered India's environment minister and the country's leading glaciologist when he attacked those who questioned his claim as purveyors of "voodoo science".

The environment Minister Jairam Ramesh had cited research indicating some Himalayan glaciers were advancing in the face of the UN's claim.

• This report has been amended since it was first posted. The original headline and first paragraph may have left the mistaken impression that Himalayan glaciers in general are advancing rather than shrinking. We wish to confirm, as was made clear further on in the original article, that this finding related to only one of the areas studied, the Karakoram range, where it was found that rocks and mud on the surface of glaciers are helping to protect them from melting.

So to be consistent with what these guys are saying could we imply that you measure the hot points and the cold points on the globe and average it and 'pop' the average is the same!Now the thing that does change is the moisture in the air and thats responsible for changing the temperature so what we have to do is cut down all the trees so they dont aspire moisture into the atmosphere and all breath into plastic bags that are stuffed into our esky's so that we can condense our breath then recycle that water back into our rainwater tanks. We have to shoot all the moose because we have all seen how much water vapor comes out of their breath in the snow. Its all the fault of Moose, I can see it coming, Monty Python was right.

“A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.”

So I guess we can say that "weather" in general is caused by "global warming" then, hey? But say, haven't we had weather since the beginning of time? Then wonder how it suddenly becomes a problem??

RE: ENdangered species? I just read that by conservative estimates, 9,000 species are going extinct each year, most of them in the rain forests and on the other side of that coin, I also saw that 16,969 new species were discovered in 2006 according to a report compiled by Arizona State University's International Institute for Species Exploration. So species come and species go.

But the most important thing about all this is that we KNOW it's all a hoax and even though the planet may warm and cool, there's exactly ZERO that we can do to stop that!

The latest research belies the idea that storms are getting more extreme.

By ANNE JOLIS

Last week a severe storm froze Dallas under a sheet of ice, just in time to disrupt the plans of the tens of thousands of (American) football fans descending on the city for the Super Bowl. On the other side of the globe, Cyclone Yasi slammed northeastern Australia, destroying homes and crops and displacing hundreds of thousands of people.

Some climate alarmists would have us believe that these storms are yet another baleful consequence of man-made CO2 emissions. In addition to the latest weather events, they also point to recent cyclones in Burma, last winter's fatal chills in Nepal and Bangladesh, December's blizzards in Britain, and every other drought, typhoon and unseasonable heat wave around the world.

But is it true? To answer that question, you need to understand whether recent weather trends are extreme by historical standards. The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project is the latest attempt to find out, using super-computers to generate a dataset of global atmospheric circulation from 1871 to the present.

As it happens, the project's initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. "In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years," atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder. "So we were surprised that none of the three major indices of climate variability that we used show a trend of increased circulation going back to 1871."

In other words, researchers have yet to find evidence of more-extreme weather patterns over the period, contrary to what the models predict. "There's no data-driven answer yet to the question of how human activity has affected extreme weather," adds Roger Pielke Jr., another University of Colorado climate researcher.

We do know that carbon dioxide and other gases trap and re-radiate heat. We also know that humans have emitted ever-more of these gases since the Industrial Revolution. What we don't know is exactly how sensitive the climate is to increases in these gases versus other possible factors—solar variability, oceanic currents, Pacific heating and cooling cycles, planets' gravitational and magnetic oscillations, and so on.

Given the unknowns, it's possible that even if we spend trillions of dollars, and forgo trillions more in future economic growth, to cut carbon emissions to pre-industrial levels, the climate will continue to change—as it always has.

That's not to say we're helpless. There is at least one climate lesson that we can draw from the recent weather: Whatever happens, prosperity and preparedness help. North Texas's ice storm wreaked havoc and left hundreds of football fans stranded, cold, and angry. But thanks to modern infrastructure, 21st century health care, and stockpiles of magnesium chloride and snow plows, the storm caused no reported deaths and Dallas managed to host the big game on Sunday.

Compare that outcome to the 55 people who reportedly died of pneumonia, respiratory problems and other cold-related illnesses in Bangladesh and Nepal when temperatures dropped to just above freezing last winter. Even rich countries can be caught off guard: Witness the thousands stranded when Heathrow skimped on de-icing supplies and let five inches of snow ground flights for two days before Christmas. Britain's GDP shrank by 0.5% in the fourth quarter of 2010, for which the Office of National Statistics mostly blames "the bad weather."

Arguably, global warming was a factor in that case. Or at least the idea of global warming was. The London-based Global Warming Policy Foundation charges that British authorities are so committed to the notion that Britain's future will be warmer that they have failed to plan for winter storms that have hit the country three years running.

A sliver of the billions that British taxpayers spend on trying to control their climes could have bought them more of the supplies that helped Dallas recover more quickly. And, with a fraction of that sliver of prosperity, more Bangladeshis and Nepalis could have acquired the antibiotics and respirators to survive their cold spell.

A comparison of cyclones Yasi and Nargis tells a similar story: As devastating as Yasi has been, Australia's infrastructure, medicine, and emergency protocols meant the Category 5 storm has killed only one person so far. Australians are now mulling all the ways they could have better protected their property and economy.

But if they feel like counting their blessings, they need only look to the similar cyclone that hit the Irrawaddy Delta in 2008. Burma's military regime hadn't allowed for much of an economy before the cyclone, but Nargis destroyed nearly all the Delta had. Afterwards, the junta blocked foreign aid workers from delivering needed water purification and medical supplies. In the end, the government let Nargis kill more than 130,000 people.

Global-warming alarmists insist that economic activity is the problem, when the available evidence show it to be part of the solution. We may not be able to do anything about the weather, extreme or otherwise. But we can make sure we have the resources to deal with it when it comes.

Miss Jolis is an editorial page writer for The Wall Street Journal Europe.

Greenhouse gas emissions in the US dropped to their lowest level in 15 years in 2009 as the impact of the financial crisis led to decreases in fuel and electricity consumption, according to newly published figures.

In 2009, the US saw its emissions of the six main greenhouses gases drop 6 per cent year-on-year to 6,633m metric tonnes, the lowest total since 1995. Despite that annual fall, emissions rose by more than 7.3 per cent between 1990 and 2009.

The figures, released by the Environmental Protection Agency, are likely to be seized upon by Republicans as evidence that there is no need for further regulation of carbon emissions. The GOP has embarked on a campaign in recent months to strip the EPA of its ability to regulate hydrocarbons as well as other pollutants.

A Republican-sponsored bill recently passed by the House has been viewed as a wide-ranging attack on the EPA. The proposed legislation argues that carbon dioxide was not mentioned in the Clean Air Act which gave the EPA legal authority to regulate air pollutants.

The greenhouse gas inventory – which also calculated carbon dioxide emissions that were removed from the atmosphere through the uptake of carbon by forests, vegetation and soil – has been submitted by the US to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The US signed and ratified the convention, which sets an overall global framework for nations to address climate change, in 1992.

Since My 8th Grade Earth Science Class, Fossil hunting for ocean floor plant life on a hill side near the little town of McCoy, elevation 6700ft above sea level. It has been very easy to understand Climate Change is the constant, humanity is not

It is estimated the Earth has been around 4.5 to 4.6 billion years. Mans ability to record data on the earths temperatures is but a very small sampling. the rest is theory.

Given we are racers and/or enthusiast of the internal combustion engine, I would put forth a simple comparison.

We race our vehicles down a track that is 1320 feet long, If we gave mans ability to record data a generous time frame of 2000 years, divided 2000 by 4.5 billion to come up with the percentage of the earths existence man has had the ability to record that data...my calculator errors out. If we knew what that number was and then applied the same math to our quarter mile pass, calculated the distance that our race car traveled, I am thinking it would require a electron microscope to see the area that our race car traveled at that same sample percentage.

Any way, now our race team now discusses, theorizes, plans and implements changes based on that sampling of data, How effective do you think those changes would really be only knowing what our race car did in a microscopic distance.

It is my opinion that yes, there is climate change, yes we could possibly have global warming, it is also my opinion that there is enough geological evidence that there is a natural cycle of warming and cooling,

I would imagine, that just like the acceleration curve of a engine being run on a Dyno, inside that acceleration there is actually a oscillation of acceleration and deceleration...

Again, If we were to compare a similar percentage sampling between the earths temperature fluctuation to the same percentage of the engines acceleration cycle, could we truly know if our engine was accelerating or decelerating? Can we truly tell if the earth is warming or cooling?

I am of the opinion, I do not have enough data to make a educated decision, they could be right, they could be wrong.

I am also of the opinion that yes Fossil Fuels of are a finite amount, yes man will most likely us them up and yes, we need to be good stewards of this earth, the longevity of Humanity as we know it most likely depends on it.

I am also of the Opinion, those who lead this charge, those that are rallying to convince others that some how taxes, carbon credits, energy programs that channel tax payer money into programs and peoples pockets for alternative fuels that consume more energy than they will ever produce, convincing others that man has the ability to legislate climate control...this is truly the Hoax. An incredible arrogance of mankind and what should be a criminal act by those who understand what they are doing...and pure act of idiocy of those who follow blindly.

As long as there is humanity, there will be consumption, as long as humanity is on the face of this earth, man will have a effect on the climate, regardless of our energy sources. How large that effect is? Only time will tell.

Dont get me started on global warming. It pains me greatly that the politicialns in my country listened to only one side of the argument. I even watched the one sided expert talk to them on TV. So they now we are saddled with political decisions that are biased to global warming being the result of CO2. I ask anyone "How can a gas that absorbs reflected infra red radiation from dirt to extinction in a distance of 10 meters at the current concentration cause an increase in temperature by increasing its concentration and changing the distance to extinction to LESS Than 10 meters". I know of nothing that when you decrease its sphere of influence it actually increases its effect.

If some of the radiation waveband absorbed by CO2 actually escaped into space and we increased the concentration so that none of it escaped then it would be valid to state that the energy retention has increased therefor the ultimate end of the cycle will be a temperature increase. But thats not going to happen when its all over and done in 30 feet is it. It doesnt matter what you do with concentration levels, all the radiation is still trapped on the planet so it has no bearing on temperature. It may change air flow pattens but thats a weather change not global warming. now the weather around the world at the moment is what it was in 1939 to 1945, so nothings new.

And be sure to check out the links in this article. Note that the most destructive and deadly tornado in recorded history was in 1925, which was BEFORE the waming craze mind you and it killed 695 people?

Whenever there is an excuse to push this phony global warming debate, the Obama Media will take the opportunity. Why? Do you really need to ask? Who are the people behind this phony global warming nonsense? It’s the left, in case you haven’t checked. It’s the people who believe in big governments who seize wealth and distribute it according to political considerations. People are concerned about tornadoes. This is seen by the left as an opportunity to promote their “environmental justice” global warming nonsense. Look at Diane Sawyer, for instance. She wants to know if this is a preview of life under global warming. Well isn’t that great. She didn’t ask if global warming was the cause. The belief that the tornadoes are being caused by global warming was the very premise of her question. But is she right? Here’s some info for you. Climatologist Victor Gensini of the University of Georgia says that "weather and climate are different concepts, and just as it is difficult to tie any specific snowstorm or drought to climate change, the same goes for tornado outbreaks."Dr. Howard Bluestein, a meteorology professor at the University of Oklahoma says: “I don't think we can prove whether or not the occurrence of all these bad events this year are due to global warming whatsoever. They could be simply due to natural variability."Harold Brooks, research meteorologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, Oklahoma says, "This year is an extraordinary outlier.” But when you examine the records over time, "we see no correlation between global or US national temperature and tornado occurrence. The single deadliest tornado in US history, described in early accounts, killed 695 people when a massive twister tore up parts of Missouri, southern Illinois and southwestern Indiana in 1925 (before global warmers had their panties in a wad).